Skip to main content
1:00 am
you have any idea that if the sequestration numbers change, what are they going to change. i am trying to put my i am trying to put my budget together. i am not want to argue or throw darts or rocks at anybody. i just want to know what the numbers are. >> thank you for the question, governor. i will refer to be chairman, who is on the legislative branch in terms of what the internal discussions and working have been. my understanding is that on the house side, in the process of working through what had been previously agreed upon budget caps, as they started to move a bill through, they are concerned about the impact of those caps.
1:01 am
what i have heard and read is that they will come back in the fall and see if they can come back to the table with something on the house side. a similar exercise occurred on the senate side. the senate bill was beyond sequestration lovell's. we, -- the senate bill was beyond sequestration levels. we, at the department, felt better about the senate bill. sequestration is a blunt instrument. pham and arithmetic perspective, it places the with- -- from an arithmetic perspective, it places caps and makes it difficult for us to accomplish the goals we have for our country across a variety of
1:02 am
fronts. i think there is a growing sense that there is a need to re-look at it. >> you do not have any idea of what the numbers are or some of the projects. i can live with it. >> with i am saying to you is that the situation is obviously very fluid. in our department, we happen to be ready for just about anything. >> thank you, mr. secretary. we are honored to have you with us. most governors recognize how important transportation is to
1:03 am
their success in their states. as a former elected official, you understand that. it is economic development and the ability to expand economically. in the state of utah, we have stepped up our commitment to transportation in a significant way. we have put 500% more state money into state highways, roads, and into a augmenting the state system. we just completed 15 miles of interstate 15, expanding the lane capacity, hov lanes. we did it all without federal dollars. we are trying to put our resources where we think they need to be in the infrastructure and road building. i would like to ask you the same question i asked chairman bill shuster. i had a group of contractors i met with a few months back. they build a lot of roads in the
1:04 am
western part of the united states. they believe regulations coming to the federal -- from the federal government are burdensome and counterproductive and there are too many strings attached to the federal dollars and it is inhibiting them from building roads in the most efficient and effective way possible. they said they could build roads better for 25% less if there is regulation reform. i would like to have you respond to that issue and if that is something that is being addressed in your area of responsibility. do we have too many regulations getting in the way of effective, efficient, and cost-effective road construction? >> that is a great question. thank you for asking it. one of the first acts i have taken as transportation secretary is a notice of rule- making that pertains to
1:05 am
truckers. right now, if a truck driver is running a route, they have to inspect the vehicle at the time they picked the vehicle up and have to do it again when they return it. they are required to submit a piece of paper each time they do that. we have found that 95% of the time there is no problem with the vehicle. the paper work is being submitted to say there is no problem with the vehicle. we have made its proposed rule that eliminates the need to file that piece of paper. there will still be an inspection, but we do not need to be told the vehicle is ok if it is ok. we expect that rule will save the trucking industry $1.70 billion. what i want to say to you at the outset is that i am interested in ways that we can streamline and make more efficient our
1:06 am
transportation system as long as we are not compromising safety. i am interested in your list of any potential changes to our rules, regulations that you think will help us make the system more efficient. i have been talking to a few of your colleagues, governor malloy in connecticut, who has a big bridge project that is coming in at $280 million under budget and ahead of schedule. in transportation, time is money. if we can speed things along, i want us to do it. we have an internal initiative and map 21 allows us to look at streamlining in a big way. if you have ideas about regulation, i am interesting in
1:07 am
partnering with you. i am interested in partnering with you to make things run better. >> secretary foxx, thank you for joining us. i am glad you have experience working for a political subdivision. it is a good perspective for you to bring to your job. the question is on the problem of certainty of funding for states. in north dakota, we need more transportation money just like everybody else. even a bigger problem for us is the sixth month authorization, the six month funding periods cause us a lot of problems with the construction season is extremely seasonal. can you work with congress to try to create more
1:08 am
predictability of the cash flow for at least a 12 month period? or at least some kind of base certainty with the possibility of some enhancement later. we cannot bid projects with a federal share of less we know that money absolutely, for sure is forthcoming. the way it has been going in the last few years, we literally have to wait until the last set -- second to be sure we have the money for a bid. the more lead time we give these contractors, the better the business that we get. it would save all of us money if we had some sense for at least a 12 month period of what is
1:09 am
coming. >> thank you for the comment, governor. i could not agree with you more. there is a substantial need for all of our stakeholders in the transportation industry for long-term look outs in terms of budgeting and funding availability and instability within the system. what i would also say to that is we have to see transportation in the context of what is happening globally, which is that the while i think american workers are the best workers in the world, while i think we have the best infrastructure in the world, we have a world that is quickly trying to catch up to us. we cannot afford to wait to
1:10 am
create the 21st century infrastructure that is going to make this country continue to achieve our goals economically. i haven't strong belief that there is a bipartisan understanding of that -- i have a strong belief that there is a bipartisan -- bipartisan understanding of that. it is so important, not only to us, but also important to our children that we figure out a way forward that helps this country compete. >> we appreciate the historic nature of your appearance here in your first significant address. we appreciate the symbolism and the reality of that relationship. also your comments in talking
1:11 am
historically of the things we have done over the last 100 years. the primary message of funding our roads -- a method of funding our roads, from healed taxes. -- field taxes. at the beginning of your tenure as the secretary of transportation and as you look at states and you begin your tenure, what sort of longer-term advice to you have about the discussion we need to have about what the form of the income line is? we not only talk about timing, but we invented a system where cars got 10 miles a gallon and now they get 40. we have the trucking industry that is getting ready to switch to natural gas.
1:12 am
as you sit where you are right now, what advice to you have for us about helping to lead a national discussion about how we transition the funding models into the future the same way technology is shifting the way people moving to the future. >> it is a great question. a couple of points. we are seeing activity in the state and local governments already today. as you go through measures and sales taxes, there are fuel taxes that have been under discussion. we want to understand what the sentiment is at the local and state levels as it relates to these different alternatives. there is no question that we have a structural funding problem. the magnitude of it is not lost on me. we have also got some shorter- term fiscal issues that also
1:13 am
need to get undressed. -- addressed. we will be looking across a range of different options. we will be looking to congress a lot on this. you can have the greatest idea in the world. if it has no chance of making it through, it is almost moot. i think we have got a lot of work to do with capitol hill on this question. we are seeing in states and local government a lot of things that are encouraging in terms of leadership being willing to step forward, and also citizens actually getting it and supporting some of the measures put out there in the states. >> thank you, mr.
1:14 am
secretary for being with us and speaking so clearly to the issue. i also want to thank you for coming to connecticut as your first visit as secretary. i have been in government a long time, as a part-timer, a full time, a mayor, a governor. i have never seen an environment this one as long as where it was inexpensive as it currently is. with different monetary policies that interest rates will go up, they were slowlyy go up relatively , at least before they get back to the norms that we were used to in the 1980s and before the downturn. there seems to be this incredible disconnect. sayalked about what people
1:15 am
and how they can save money if we change rules and regulation and that sort of stuff. discussion with interest groups on how to change the rules and how it would save money. of course if they want us to spend more money on projects. clearly missing and i know the chairman mentioned this, the lack of inflation in construction is an incredible opportunity that we have and that we are absolutely missing taking advantage of. you referenced a major project that has been underway for a number of years. it is ahead of time because we can get every resource on the spot that we need to complete the project. under budget because the bidding environment is incredibly row- government at the moment. the question i have to my fellow
1:16 am
governors on both sides is whether we are doing everything thisssibly can to see prevail in the issue of transportation in this nation? i have flushed democrats and republican congressman, that from trips to china and elsewhere and marvel at the -- ofof in the structure infrastructure. marveled at how fast trains moved in china. marveled at the rate of how fast trains are being built. yet in the financial environment where we can bring those products to our states at a reasonably of way, we are squandering this opportunity. is there anything else that we could do to be heard on this issue?
1:17 am
we want to be that bipartisan voice that is so seldom heard on washington on this issue. >> anyone care to respond to that? >> you want a response, governor? you mention common sense. i do not know if that is always in the political arena. we have decreased our spending by 500% in utah. we have wrapped up the opportunity. we have been in a fiscal decision to do that. limitation. that,untarily do 85% of so if we have an emergency, we have the capacity to borrow money. we are trying to borrow money in a prudent way. we do some cash and carry. needs.struction has
1:18 am
we are trying to take advantage of what you said. it does have an economic benefit. top them do what they need do. get from point a to point b. if they cannot do that, they will go about their businesses. we are trying to take advantage of the opportunity, but doing it in fiscal leap prudent ways. that is the utah way. another pointdd on this question of how to pay for the infrastructure we need. two other points to get back to. at is that we have to look the cost structure of projects themselves. the way we build projects in this country is like a creaky old pipe.
1:19 am
often times we go back and reflect on how we can make that process go faster. there is innovation in instruction. there are modular pieces that in some cases have allowed entire over a to be placed weekend. for you say you have a day 60 days, it saves money. i would say another place where is looking together at ways that we can make the pipeline move faster. we can work with the construction industry and so forth. the other piece, and i haven't talked about a lot, it is the public-private partnership opportunities. you all know as well as anyone how important that type of partnership can be. we are seeing projects across this country that are being put together.
1:20 am
we are seeing instrumentation's with things like infrastructure across the country. that is another piece of the equation. i would put an asterisk are the private-public partnerships. i think there will still always be projects that will not be good candidates for public- private partnerships. they do not spin off revenue or do not have the potential to do that. i do not want us to have irrational exuberance about them, but they are a critical piece of the toolbox that we need going forward. if there are ways we at the federal level can help make that happen, we ought to be doing it. -- nine >> thank you. >> there is red tape and trying
1:21 am
to finish projects, you know the challenges ahead. one thing i wanted to bring your attention to is that we are a bipartisan group of both parties. had a red tape review committee. transportation is one of the key segments. there are recommendations we were able to come together with the ways we think we can approve in nation's infrastructure regards to the costliness and effectiveness of getting projects done. we have many categories from the faa to nasa and the mexican border to federal highway and environmental issues and funding issues.
1:22 am
we have all of the suggestions from governors on how to help with the red tape to make things more efficient. i would like to give this to you. >> i would love that. i will definitely read through it. >> other questions? we are very close to our scheduled end. .hank you to secretary foxx here andyour time appreciate and are honored by your president -- by your presence. >> thank you. [applause] it islso want to mention one of the governor's birthdays. happy birthday, governor. [applause]
1:23 am
any further business? if not, the meeting is adjourned. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
1:24 am
1:25 am
>> after the first session of the national governors association, veterans enjoying a ride to the harley-davidson museum. activity.part in the
1:26 am
♪ ♪
1:27 am
[playing "born to be wild"] ♪
1:28 am
[engines revving] [applause] >> south dakota governor, utah governor,colorado and -- ppi governor, ♪
1:29 am
>> we will have more from the national governors association meeting in milwaukee tomorrow with the final segment. -- e'll be remarks from you can watch that live tomorrow eastern.p.m. >> when did we reach a point
1:30 am
when you needed to have a certain philosophy because of the color of your skin? when did that happen? [cheers and applause] every reporter once asked me why i do not talk a lot about race. i said because i am a neurosurgeon. [laughter] it does seem strange. when i come into the operating the skin andke off the bones, i'm operating on the that person is. the cover does not make them who they are. when will people understand that? [applause] carson takes your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets on book tv on c-span 2. >> when the first electronic computer was made, it was estimated or could never be a
1:31 am
market for more than two or three. today there are more than 5000 computers. >> this is a replica of a machine that was designed in 1890. almost 10 years to complete. the government knew it was in big trouble because it would run out of time before the 1900 census would be due. a way around the problem was to automate or recognize the problem. askway they saw this was to a bunch of questions that census takers ask and punch the responses into small pieces of cardboard called punchcards. >> the first 2000 years of computing. sunday at 7 p.m.. part of american history tv every weekend on c-span 3. a look of never before and seen footage of president nixon
1:32 am
and his administration. it is part of a documentarian that recently aired on cnn. this is 40 minutes. host: our guest now is brian frye. of "our nixon." good morning, thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. host: there is any number of movies out there about richard nixon, even recently. what makes this one different? guest: really distinctive thing about this is the vast bulk of the movie consists of home movies filmed by nixon's closest aides. these are super 8 home movies they made while working for the president that pretty much no one has ever seen before. host: how did this come about?
1:33 am
guest: initially the movies were in john ehrlichman's office and were confiscated during the watergate investigation and the other material that was in his office. those home movies that in the national archives for very long time. it was not like there were suppressed, just forgotten. unlike the secret tapes or the other types of documentary material, they did not relate to anything of abuse of power issues. there were ignored. eventually in the early 2000, the national archives pursuit of preservation effort where they took the home movies and blew them up to 16 millimeter so they would be available for a longer about of time, a preservation as it were. i learned about that from a friend of mine as a person who was making the reservation copy and really interested in the movie and was thinking about it for a long time and the possibilities.
1:34 am
in 2008, i met penny lane and we discussed the existence of these and decided we would collaborate on making a movie out of them. we had never seen the movies before because they had been preserved but not made available to the public. we actually invested about $20,000, a little less, in paying for the national archives to make the first of video transfers just so we could see the materials and see whether there was a movie in there, and thankfully, there was. host: let's see a clip. it runs one minute 15 seconds about his trip to china. [video clip] >> i found out i was gone to china from bob holtz. i was the acting chief political figure.
1:35 am
the thing about the flight to china was -- one of the things was it was just a real. -- just surreal. the plane is taking off to go to china and we have a television set watching us take off. everything about that trip was televised. it was a production from start to finish. >> the president will journey in the dead of winter, a season especially severe in the chinese capital. the white house reemphasized the purpose to become the first american president to visit mainland china. >> as president nixon has pointed out on a number of locations, he will try in the meeting to seek a new direction in the relationship between our countries. end the isolation of our great peoples from each other.
1:36 am
host: tell us more. [laughter] guest: the scene that you see there is from richard nixon's trip to china. pretty much the bulk of nixon's presidency. his aides were filming throughout the time they worked for nixon, up until that time they resigned before the watergate investigation began. you see the nixon presidency through their eyes, but also through the lens of network news. host: we have a response from the deputy assistant. i think the characterization is very stereotyped. i think penny layne viewed it projected exactly what people are sick of seeing.
1:37 am
it does not zero in on the incredible six decades of political life he had and his contribution to the country. what do you think? guest: well, i guess he is entitled to his opinion. we tried to be fair and represent nixon. i think it would be dishonest not to include the negative things as well as the positive things. host: are you interested in president make sent prior to this? -- were you interested in president makes in prior to this? this?on prior to guest: i am a law professor, as
1:38 am
well as a filmmaker. as well as his story and and and academic. i have an interest in american history, but not specifically and richard nixon. we made this more based on the fact that we realized there was an incredible treasure trove of visual material that has not been explored today -- have not been explored and we're interested to see what it had to offer for documentary material. host: our guest is co-owner of the phone company that made this product. it is called "our nixon" and debuts tonight. as our guest mentioned, assistant professor of law at the university of kentucky, college of law. before we get to calls, a little bit more about the process of making the movie. he paid $20,000 to get the material. how did you decide to put it together the way you did? guest: as i said, when we pay to get the material, we have no idea what was behind it.
1:39 am
i had seen 10 minutes worth of those 35 hours of great material that my friend, bill brandt, who did the preservation show to me in the process. other than that, no idea, other than the prescription provided to us. we really just sat down. we did and art this registry. we spent two weeks looking at the material and asking ourselves what kind of movie does this one to be? -- does this want to be? we were really assisted by the assistant producer. he helped us. he helped us to realize the movie to make. host: is it all the material that the aides shot or did you work in any other archival? guest: it is roughly 60%-70% of the movie. we realized pretty quickly the problem was it is so personal and opaque in a lot of ways that
1:40 am
you could not make a movie out of just that material. we used a lot of network news footage to situate the audience in particular time and explain the context in which the movies were being made. we also used retrospective footage respecting on experiences to provide their own perspective on what it was they were experiencing. host: we will see another clip later in damages depicting life -- and images depicting life in the richard nixon era. in the meantime, our caller. of "ourye, co-producer nixon." caller: good morning, c-span. i was a republican back in those
1:41 am
days. i respect the presidency of nixon, and am very disappointed on how the presidency has suffered since nixon. it was not an overwhelming kingdom or nothing like that, it is just the disrespect of the presidency, as president obama has suffered with respect and decency. nixon had it, even though he was a vital person in some eyes. i am asking you to comment on two points. one, that affirmative action presentation came from richard nixon, a republican. two, i wonder if you can comment on the actual economic price freezes that nixon instituted during his term. today we have presidents who lack the guts to perform as he did.
1:42 am
i think thin if you could please comment on the fact that republicans today reject affirmative action and economic price freezes and the fact that the presidency has lost the respect of the congressional connection. host: not quite about the film but the presidency as he sees it. guest: i will do my best. i will not claim to be a policy expert, but i think a lot of people feel the way you do. i know not chomsky preferred to the last liberal president. i think it is a fair point. you say you are a republican during the nixon administration. i think that is true of a lot of people. one thing we interested in while making the movie was the way in which the conventional wisdom looking back at history tends to track the people who are the winners, as it were.
1:43 am
nixon, as a lot of people forget, was the overwhelming winner of the 1972 presidential election. we were interested in how that came to be and what the world that nixon was living in, the america. host: tom and wellington. caller: what is the source for your funding, and is there any way to contribute? thank you.
1:44 am
guest: the film was founded in many different ways. the initial funding came out of my pocket. then we did a kickstart campaign, which was the source of the additional seed money. also, really got the word out about the movie. the kickstart was the termination of the movie. subsequently we got a lot of grant money from the private and public sources. the final funding was provided by a number of additional organizations, including private york,ot new
1:45 am
which is an advertising production company and impact partners. host: do you know the overall price? guest: i can't say. we premiered the film internationally in the netherlands and the u.s. premiere at south by southwest in austin, texas. cnn and a lot of other people saw it at south by southwest. the sale was closed at fault by south -- south by southwest by our sales agent, josh. [video clip] >> a typical day for me, older men would pick me up around 7:15. the car would get bob and then his aide.
1:46 am
then it would swing by my house and then to the white house. i am responsible for the scheduling and the president's daily activities. i knew my place. it really reflected a lot about richard nixon, the degree to which he wanted things controlled. >> it literally was from 6:00 in the morning to 9:00 at night every day of the week. saturdays and sundays, too. that pace was unremitting. total consuming for someone like me. >> i was tough on people, feeling i had to be. there is something of the presidency of zero defect. you have to operate as close to zero defect as you can.
1:47 am
i was concerned with the result the president wanted that was carried out. host: brian frye, a little more perspective on how that got put together and to the men were. -- and who the men were. guest: right. holderman was a long-time employee of richard nixon. the story goes he first tried to volunteer for him. many of his staffers came from the advertising industry, including dwight. he was the chief of staff throughout most of his presidency until he resigned. during the watergate investigation.
1:48 am
john ehrlichman was a college friend who first came on as the white house counsel, and then later became chief adviser for domestic policy. he was seen as a driving force for the clean air act, clean water act, earth day, any number of modern and in our urban policies. really interesting guy who went on to become a best-selling novelist and commentator. he got out of prison after watergate. cheap bid was a special assistant to the president. basically the person who handled the president's calendar. also implicated not specifically in the watergate scandal, but another 30 scandal laid out in this. scandaler dirty tricks
1:49 am
laid out in this. host: we have a call coming in from louisiana. independent calller. good morning, david. caller: who did nixon convince to take us off the gold standard? guest: the film does not get into the specifics of his economic policies. so i really could not comment. advisers of economic recommended that policy. host: democratic caller. go ahead. caller: i have a question
1:50 am
concerning the campaign. how did you handle the coverage of those campaigns, which were extremely close? guest: the film does not cover the campaigns at all. it begins with his inauguration, which is the initial material available to us. they did not begin until the administration begins. the basis for the films being available to us, the basis being public domain is they were confiscated as materials created by employees of the white house while they were working for the president. so there is nothing in the collection that we obtained and made the film out of that pre-dated the inauguration. the second campaign, the 1972 campaign is very much a part of the movie because they were filming during that period. host: with the film debut in tonight, there are any number of
1:51 am
reps in the papers. here is "the washington post" -- and "the new york times" art section -- they go on to write these are private affairs. are a few shots of the guys laughing or laying around. they go on to write that parties are official affairs and private moments show where the president is relaxed and smiling. only at work, be it on the great wall of china, pacing outside the vatican or conferring on air force one.
1:52 am
what do you think? guest: i am a little puzzled by it. there are several shots of parties on the white house lawn and a man dressed in a bunny suit running around. them sitting around with their shirts off by the pools. i am a little bit confused by the comment, but entitled to your opinion. host: what scene do you think is most significant? guest: there is a really disturbing and humorous, but unfortunate conversation between nixon and his aides about the television that show, about archie bunker in which nixon is concerned that homosexuals are ruining america. and he complains that aristotle and socrates were homosexuals
1:53 am
and ehrlichman chimes in that they did not have the influence that television has, which i find amusing. i think there is a lot of really moving sequences as well. the film closes with a conversation with all the men and the president immediately after he announced the resignation on national television. i think it is a really telling moment that really makes you feel for the kind of pain that he was feeling. we really wanted to convey that these people, even though they committed criminal acts and did really bad things, they are still people. and it is worth understanding them as people to try to get a feel for why they did what they
1:54 am
did, what brought them to the point. host: mark calling from twin falls, idaho. good morning. caller: hi. i wondered, watergate, i did not have any recall of that era, but was that just before an election? why did they think they need at the edge of information? guest: that is a really good question that i think pretty much everyone is puzzled by. we did a panel discussion in lexington, kentucky, where i teach. a republican who used to work for the governor, the best he could think of when you are in office and a politician you are
1:55 am
always in campaign mode, always looking for an edge, and maybe that was it, because in retrospect it does not make sense. nixon won the 1972 election by such a massive amount. he won 49 of the 50 states. the only state that he carried was massachusetts. in the popular vote almost 10 million votes different. crazy. really hard to understand why they thought that was necessary. in the movie, immediately after the watergate investigation or watergate break-in where the head of the democratic party, lawrence o'brien, is on tv complaining that i thought this was a law and order administration.
1:56 am
you can almost see the grin on his face. host: dennis now from san diego. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to tell you i served in the u.s. marines from august 1974-1976. the week of the marine birthday, november 1975, i was part of a group of marines had a birthday off the base, and after the ceremony, richard nixon, the former president, came inside to greet us, and he said what is the last corporal drink? i was 19 at the time. we were allowed to drink on base, but not off base. i said the last corporal does not drink. he looked at me real hard and said what did you say?
1:57 am
i said sir, the lance corporal will have a budweiser, sir. he slapped the bar with his hand and said, two budweiser's. he and i sat together and we talked. he talked and i listened. he told me his views about china and vietnam. i was very honored for that contact with him. i remember it always. guest: that is very cool. i think you will enjoy the movie. there are several scenes in san clemente. there is also a scene in the film in which richard nixon has a visit to vietnam and talked to soldiers there as well. you are lucky to have had a
1:58 am
budweiser with the president. from what i understand, he was more partial to martinis. a pretty great experience. host: one thing you wanted to portray, they are human beings, despite what they were dealing with at the time. what else do what books to learn from the movie? -- want folks to learn from the movie? guest: it is an experienced a movie. in my experience, it is hard to convey factual information in a short them. hopefully we get that in there. if you are not familiar with the nixon presidency, you will get a pretty good overview of what happened. some of, not all of, but the key accomplishments and problems that happened during the presidency. what we're learning more about is the personalities, the relationship between that nixon's staff members and nixon himself. we wanted to really capture
1:59 am
their experience to the best we could understand of what it was like to work for the president and what it felt like to work for the president, not from the perspective of anti-war but the perspective of square america? host: what was the biggest challenge in watching in piecing together the pieces? guest: right. the movie is made 100% of archival material. we did not script anything. everything we used in the movie was historical, primary source material. frankly, the biggest challenge was making it make sense. that is really hard to do.
2:00 am
really hard to use the material. really hard to use the material. very rich material, but not material that it's easy to work and to into the foam. it is incredibly personal information and revealing. -- and into the film. you do not ever your president's talking to each other that would normally. providing the context so they make sense and can understand what they're talking about was really a challenge. we were super fortunate to have our fantastic editor who helped us realize a film that does a good job of pulling together these different strains. host: duncan, you are on with brian frye, co-producer of "our nixon." caller: a secret society that richard nixon was a member of. i have considered moving to california for a lot of reasons, especially for ones like it exposing the growth. was there any mention of nixon being a member of the bohemian grove? guest: no.
2:01 am
the super eight domes are silent. they are ones that was made wherever they went with nixon. i do not believe there was any actual footage taken in the bohemian grove, although in the collection, there is a sequence in which nixon visits california to give an award to lbj or ladybird. we were only able to conclude that the minutes of the third five hours of footage, all of which is really interesting. we were able to give that to the general public. we thought the american people should have access to it. host: john, in clarksburg, virginia. independent calller. good morning. caller: i am from alexandria, virginia. wonderful. first of all, i cannot wait to see this. i think it will be a great documentary. this is a gift that keeps on giving. i wanted to adjust by comment to what he said earlier when the call in asking about the 1972 election and the democratic headquarters. i think in the biography they
2:02 am
pointed this out very clearly and thought it was a good reason. by 19 at 71 the nixon campaign that had begun was not sure they were going to be reelected. it was looking fairly bad because the vietnam war strategy was not viewed as a success of pulling people out, but not being able to get the north vietnamese to seize activities. the economy was starting to go down word. was doing very well in some polls. if it were not able to do that, then there was always ted kennedy waiting in the wings. i think nixon felt concerned that a kennedy candidacy would be very difficult to overcome, a particularly with all of the division in the country, and also because of the domestic things that have happened and the first term. i think that is a very important reason for people to understand that in hindsight it looks as
2:03 am
though it is a crazy thing to do, but at the time, and for anyone who has worked in government, you know that sometimes initiatives take a life of their own and sometimes get forgotten about, and yet, they still move forward.
2:04 am
i think that may have been something that played into the administration. guest: that is totally a fair point. i think it is hard to know how people were thinking. at that point i would say it is always hard for politicians to play hard but should also play fair.
2:05 am
host: one viewer asked for more information. 9:00 tonight on cnn. midnight tonight on cnn. they will do that all over again on sunday. this will go into a broader release. guest: the film will open theatrically. it will open in san francisco in september. l.a., portland and the broader, the better so people are interested in seeing it their home town, they shall let people know there want it. host: what are you expecting?
2:06 am
guest: i am pinching myself that it has done so well. when we started making this movie, we expected it at a museum somewhere. ruth it just exploded, which is really exciting. i am really happy we are able to share this with some of the people. how large are the films and what else have you worked on? guest: this movie. period. penny lane is working on a new movie entitled "nuts" about john r. brinkley who gained -- gained fame in the 1920's by transplanting go testicles into men. then border radio and provided entryway for rock and roll into a mayor, and ultimately went down in the investigation from
2:07 am
the united states government. hilarious story. it is really great. i will be working on this pretty soon. host: republican call. thank you for waiting. you are on with bryan frye. caller: i just wanted to point out, i just joined the conversation a few minutes ago. as a student of history, a lot of things to not get told, so thank you for the film. in the book "citizen hughes" the reason richard nixon wanted to do the break-in was larry o'brien, the head of the democratic party and kennedy man was secretly on the pay roll like of -- other politicians were. it was pretty well documented. thank you very much. guest: that is very interesting. i will definitely check out the book. sound like an interesting read. host: conway, missouri on the line. caller: i work for the nixon family in california. we hope to tear down the old market. a new dawn nixon went to work for the same company i went to work for. a family that i really respected. i sat there were a great family. they have really been taking down the road. i wanted to say something else.
2:08 am
the three people that ran for president from california or the west coast, hoover was blamed for the economy in 1929. richard nixon, they finally got rid of him. he did some great things in my opinion. he was in office six weeks after he got shot by hinckley. that is just my own personal theory that no one from the west coast can ever be president of the united states. thank you very much. guest: guess i will not be president, because i was born in san francisco. oh well. an interesting theory. could very well be the case.
2:09 am
host: what else should people know about the project? >> i would like to let people know the end of the movie is really intended to be an open- ended look at the presidency. we really did try to be as fair and as a generous to nixon and his staff members as we felt was warranted by the material available to us. it is really intended to have something to appeal to people whether they're coming from the left, right, center, where ever. it is not also just a serious movie. there is a lot that is funny. a lot of using, interesting moments. people should not come to it thinking they are getting a history lesson. it is intended to be fun. host: jack from tennessee. republican. caller: hello. glad to be on with you. i are -- i was wondering if you are familiar with the book, of very well-documented book that was largely ignored by the media that advance the premise that the real person who initiated the watergate break-in was really john dean and his motivation was to clear out evidence that the democrats were operating a prostitute ring out of their headquarters. this book had a lot of copies of reports from employees and a lot of other information. i cannot recall the name of the
2:10 am
book unfortunately. it was written quite a while ago. are you familiar with the book? guest: i am not familiar with the book%, but i have heard that rumor -- per say, but i have heard that rumor circulated. i honestly do not have an opinion on who orchestrated the watergate break-in. i think a lot of people have come up with interesting stories and whoever knows is not talking apparently. i do not know anything anyone else does to be honest with you. host: that was our last call. final thoughts.
2:11 am
guest: i hope people will watch the film on cnn tonight. you can find it at ournixon.com or facebook. make sure to see it on tv or go to theaters when it opens later in august. host: the premiere tonight at cnn with an air at midnight and this again at midnight. our guest has been bryan frye, an assistant professor of law at the university of kentucky college of law. thank you for your time and explaining the projects to us. thank you. thank you for your time, calls. we will be back here tomorrow at 7:00 for another edition o
2:12 am
>> we will sit down with dan balz. after that, the u.s. senate race in kentucky.
2:13 am
colorado governor john higgins joins us from milwaukee were the national governors association is hosting its meeting. he will talk about the agenda and issues in colorado. we will take your call, e-mails, and tweets. >> democratic senator patrick leahy in vermont is our guest on this week's newsmakers. he discusses many of the issues is committees have addressed in the current congressional session, including the nsa surveillance programs, and gun legislation. here is a preview of some of his remarks. two hours after the state court came down. this was not a state acting like -- in the negotiation or the effort to make sure all the problems they had could be
2:14 am
fixed. and have a new voting rights act consistent with the supreme court. it is shortly -- sharply divided. five people decided after an hour of hearing argument, they understood it is a lot better than the hundreds of hearings and hundreds of hours the house and the senate had. it was overwhelmingly voted for by both republicans and democrats. , you must've gotten it wrong. we're are going to change. justicen, the chief admitted there would still be voting rights violations. >> you can see all of the senator's remarks on tomorrow's "newsmakers" at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. here on c-span.
2:15 am
>> when the first electronic computer was planned, it was -- estimated there could never be a market for more than two or three. today, there are more than 5000 computers. >> this is a replica of this machine, designed in 1890, to do the census. the 1880 census took all of 10 years to complete so the government knew it was in big trouble because it was going to run out of time before the 1900 would be due. the way around this would be to automate or mechanize the problem. the way they solved this was to ask a bunch of questions and punch the responses into small pieces of cardboard. >> the first 2000 years of computing, sunday at 7:00 p.m., part of american history tv
2:16 am
every weekend on c-span three. >> president obama outlined his , and secureod jobs retirement. maine senator susan collin give the republican address. she talks about the health care law's on job creation and wages. >> this week, i went down to an amazon warehouse in tennessee to talk -- i went down to an amazon warehouse in tennessee to talk about what needs to happen to get a bargain for the middle- class. we have fought our way back from the worst recession of our lifetimes and have begun to lay a foundation for stronger, more durable economic growth. today our businesses have created more jobs. health-care costs are growing at the slowest rate in 50 years, deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years. as any middle-class family will tell you, we are not where we need to be yet.
2:17 am
even before the crisis hit we were living for a decade while where a few at the top were doing better and better and most families were working harder and harder to get by. reversing this trend must be a hot -- must be the highest priority in washington. it is mine. but too often after the last few years washington has taken its eye off the ball. they have allowed posturing and scandals to distract from growing our economy and the strengthening the middle-class, which is why i am laying out my ideas for how to build on the cornerstone of the ideas of being middle-class in america. a good education, home of euro, health care when you get sick, and the most important cornerstone of all? a good job in a durable, growing industry. when it comes to creating more good jobs that pay decent wages, the problem is not a lack of ideas. plenty of independent economists, business owners, and people from both parties agree on what we have to do. i propose many of these ideas
2:18 am
two years ago. this seat -- this week to put forward more common-sense proposals to create more jobs in manufacturing by rebuilding america's infrastructure. what we are lacking is action from washington. that is why in addition to proposing ideas that we know will grow the economy, i put forward a strategy for breaking through the washington logjam. a grand bargain for the middle class. i am willing to work with republicans to simplify the tax code for businesses large and small, but only if we take the money that we say by transitioning to a simpler tax system and make an investment in good, middle-class jobs. we can put construction workers back on the job rebuilding the infrastructure, boosting manufacturing so that more american companies can sell their products around the world.
2:19 am
and we can help to arm our students with the skills needed for the global economy without a dime of deficit. i will keep laying out my ideas to give the middle class a better shot, reaching out to republicans for theirs. with critical investments in the future and threatening national default on the bills that congress racked up, that is not an economic plan. denying health care to millions of americans are shutting down the government because i am for keeping it open will not help the middle class. this truth is that there are no gimmicks. there are no tricks to growing the economy. reversing the erosion of middle- class security in this country will not be easy, but if we work together and take a few bold steps and if washington is willing to set aside politics and focus on what matters, we can close the region grow the economy. together we can make this country a place where everyone who works hard to get ahead. thank you, and have a great weekend.
2:20 am
>> hello, i am senator susan collins, from maine. my family founded a small business in northern maine more than 160 years ago. today it continues to be run by two of my brothers. our economy is built from billions of enterprises just like ours. it is not easy to survive in today's economy. but these employers remain our nation's job creators. we should be doing all the weekend to promote policies to
2:21 am
help them survive and thrive. effective health care reform should provide americans with access to quality and affordable care while also encouraging economic growth. that is not what is happening under obama care. instead, obama care is actually discouraging small businesses from creating jobs and hiring new employees. the law also has perverse incentives for employers to reduce the number of hours that their employees can work. while most small-business owners want to provide health insurance for their employees, many simply cannot afford to under obama care. yet even struggling businesses with 50 or more full-time employees will be required to provide health insurance or face huge fines for each employee. if you employ 49 workers, there are no blinds, but if you had just one more, you are hit with
2:22 am
penalties. these enormous penalties are a real threat to employers that want to add jobs. they are a powerful incentive for employers to refrain from hiring additional workers. even worse, and though obama care anyone working -- under obama care anyone working over 30 hours per week is considered full time, causing some businesses to reluctantly reduce the hours that their workers worked to fewer than 30 per week. it is not just the private sector that is affected. let me give you an example. a school system in my state of maine is already preparing to track and cap the number of hours that substitute teachers can work to ensure that they do not work more than 29 hours per week. fewer hours means less money in the teachers' paychecks and more destruction for the students. recently labor leaders of led by the teamsters president warned that obama care will, and i quote, eliminate the backbone of the american middle-class. they are right to be worried. in the past, most of these jobs were full time. this year the overwhelming majority of new jobs are part- time. under this troubling trend, more
2:23 am
workers will find their hours and earnings reduced. jobs will be lost. this is especially disturbing, as our country is still battling high unemployment. a study from the labor center at california berkeley underscores the danger. that study found that 10 million american workers are vulnerable to having their hours cut as a direct result of obama care. 10 million workers. most vulnerable are lower income employees. in an effort to protect these millions of workers, i have introduced a bipartisan bill called the 40 hours is full-time act. my bill would change the definition of full time employee in obama care from 30 hours per week to 40 hours per week. a 40 hour work week is full time. we all know that. this bill is just common sense. now, the obama administration has announced that it is delaying enforcement of employer mandate until 2015. but the fact is that the law remains in place and continues to discourage new jobs and full-
2:24 am
time work. of course, fixing this one flaw will not solve the countless problems caused by obama care. it would help to ensure that millions of american workers do not have their hours and pay checks reduced. small businesses are the backbone of our nation's economy. the last thing that we need is yet another obstacle to helping them grow and create much-needed jobs. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national
2:25 am
cable satellite corp. 2013] ♪
2:26 am
>> if we turn away from the needs of others, we align ourselves with those forces which are bringing about the suffering. >> the white house is a bully pulpit. >> obesity in this country is nothing short of a public health crisis. >> i think i had little antenna. >> there is so much influence in that office. it would be a shame to waste it. >> i think they serve as a window on the past to what was going on with american women. >> she becomes the chief
2:27 am
confidante. she is the only one in the world he can trust. >> many of the women who were first ladies, a lot of them were writers. they wrote books. >> they are, in many cases, more interesting as human beings than their husbands. if only because they are not first and foremost defined and limited by political ambition. >> edith roosevelt is one of the unsung heroes. when you go to the white house today, it is really edith roosevelt's white house. >> breathless, too much looking down, and i think it was a little too fast. not enough change of pace. >> yes, ma'am. >> i think in every case, the first lady has really done whatever has been her personality and her interest. >> she later wrote in her memoir -- she said, i never myself made any decisions. i only decided what was important and when to present it to my husband. when you stop and think about how much power that is, it is a lot of power. >> part of the battle against cancer is to fight the fear that accompanies the disease. >> she transformed the way we look at these bugaboos and made it possible for countless people to survive and to flourish as a result. i don't know how many presidents realistically had that kind of impact on the way we live our lives.
2:28 am
>> just walking around the white house grounds, i am constantly reminded about all of the people who had lived there before and particularly all of the women. >> "first ladies: influence and image," a c-span original series, produced in cooperation with the white house historical association rid season 2
2:29 am
premieres september 9 as we explore the modern era and first ladies from edith roosevelt to michelle obama. host: serving as a political reporter from politico, talking about the august recess -- what happened on both the house and senate side with all of these efforts going nowhere? guest: congress forgot how to vote this week. he saw an attempt at a confirmation of an etf director. it took them more than five hours, they had to leave the vote open, have a senator fly in from north dakota to get enough people on the house side. they were supposed to take up transportation, housing, and appropriations bill, we realize that the last minute they did not have enough votes. they had to yank that bill off the floor. there were a number of things going on this week in congress that shows that they were not able to get things done that they had planned before they head home for the august recess. the house voted for the 40th time to either completely repeal or partially repealed the obama care health -- affordable health care law. the senate did move a couple of nominations they had been waiting on. host: is it fair to say part of the reason both sides -- these austerity measures any sequestration measures, the penning on peoples attitudes, should we follow these rules were not yet go -- or not? guest: we have been watching austerity measures, proposals to cut spending died when enough conservatives in the house would
2:30 am
not get behind the bill. on this appropriation, the conservatives claimed victory. they cut $4 billion below the sequestration level. it was the moderates who said it was too far. they would not vote for it. host: who do we define as moderate? guest: the tuesday morning group still exists. they are a more moderate wing of the caucus. they made their own noise for the first time in this legislation. host: one of the people making news was howl rodgers. he talked about what you just talked about. tell people who he is, what he said, and why it matters. guest: he is the chairman of the committee that moves this legislation. he released a statement that was very surprising for us that follow congress. very critical of the -- of those who pulled it and those that backed the lower numbers.
2:31 am
he said it is not going to happen in september. he said there was just too much going on this week, they were going to vote on the obama care bill, they had to go home by friday at noon. they said they would get it to it in september. you pick sequestration, you have not picked some of these problems. he does not think the political will is there to get it done in september. host: ginger is here to talk about congress this week. if you have questions you can talk to her on the phone at -- you can send her a tweet if you wanted to answer a question or make a comment. you can also send us an e-mail. i know we're supposed to talk about august but let us move to
2:32 am
september real quick. come september, a couple of major issues come up with talk about the working timeframe of september and some of these deadlines that have to be met. guest: congress has gone home for the entirety of the month of august. they do not come back until after labor day. they have big deadlines coming up when they get back. there is nine legislative days left until the government runs out of funding. they cease to have the money to operate anymore. that quick deadline is pressing on them. particularly because there is no sign of a deal now. there is no sign they have worked out some type of agreement to prevent eight -- to
2:33 am
prevent passing a continuing resolution in september. that is a real pressing deadline. host: come september they have to solve these issues in nine days and we will see what happens then. any indication from leadership about the strategies? caller: we see two different strategies growing. the debt ceiling is looming. likely to have an october deadline. the debt ceiling is more of a looming target. it is like trying to plan when you're going to max out your credit cards without knowing how much money you're going to spend every day.
2:34 am
all of these are going to get rolled in together. the conservatives in the republican party want to us to use a piece of legislation to pressure the white house. it of funding or a partial repeal of the obama care law.
2:35 am
other people in the republican party say we cannot shut down government and we need to come in with better things to negotiate, particularly cuts. likely they will be pushing some cuts for entitlement programs. host: one more question about august. we could talk about specifics but at least give us an overall arching view. i would just bounce off of the national journal headline this week -- what does commerce do over recess? guest: this is going to be important for legislation, one is the immigration bill. we know that lawmakers go home, have town hall meetings, meet with their constituents. historically they have been able to push lawmakers one way or another. the immigration is going to be one of them. there are republicans and a house that her noncommittal that have to go one way or another, how they feel about the senate passed bill. a big uproar in either direction
2:36 am
from these members and their constituents could change the bill. they are going to be talking about their agenda and we know the house is going to be talking about budget cuts. the are going to become king about spending cuts and tax cut. they're going to be going to the middle class and say we put forward a budget that we thought was fair to you, talking about the president's grand bargain proposal and sell that to the poachers.
2:37 am
host: we learned about what happens this week, august, september. the full month are available to you. we will show them periodically as we go throughout the morning. here's roger from san diego, california on the independent line. caller: i want to speak directly to ms. gibson, with the august recess -- host: lewis from jacksonville, florida. republican line. caller: from what i see as a republican, since the republican party became the majority -- host: stop listening to the tv and just go ahead. caller: in the republican party we try to get the medical for the public. all the issues that come up -- suddenly we have a black president the white toys cannot get together. host: we are going to leave it there. talk about the specifics. the republicans are going out and talking about issues concerning the economy. on the democratic side, changes going to be one of the big topics of discussion. -- on the democratic side, climate change is going to be one of the big topics. caller: they think that the american people are coming around to their side. climate change is a real issue that should be addressed. there was a lot of talk about this in 2010 with the cap and trade bill did it cost so many problems for the moderate members of both sides of the aisles. both parties walked away and stopped talking about it. you remember the townhall meetings of 2010. they are going to be trying to revive that on the democratic side. in the last three years there have been a lot of movement. the cap and trade bill was pressured. your power bill was going to go up. at that time it was not something that the american people wanted to hear anything about. now they are talking about reducing emissions and regulations. going out and selling that to the american people is something else we are going to hear a lot from democrats. host: we will also hear whether the president will take some action on the keystone xl pipeline.
2:38 am
2:39 am
host: from atlanta georgia, republicans line. caller: thank you for taking my call. the first comment is ever since reagan we had this supply economics. clinton allowed the wto, which essentially took that closed labor force and made it an open
2:40 am
labor force for all of our corporations. now we have an open labor force that includes one billion chinese workers. ever since clinton allowed china into the wto our jumper numbers -- our job numbers have declined. obama is on pace to be more than 3 million, but still slow growth. that is because china -- clinton allowed china into the to the tl. i want her to discuss that. that is comment number one. number two, the media controls the hearts and minds of the people. yet is using speculation as a weapon today instead of informing the public of what has happened in the past and analyzing what has happened. they just guess what is going to happen in the future. i want you to comment on how the media creates expectations among the public. host: we will leave it there. caller: it is interesting, there is a trade agreement that is being considered. it would deal with some control in asian countries. the administration has been negotiating this trade. vietnam, japan, not china -- it will make our trading more competitive in that region. that is some -- that is close to some type of agreement. one of the issues that is
2:41 am
bubbling below the surface that is likely going to become more of an issue in the next couple of months when we return in the fall that it is going to have to have legislative approval. there could be some big changes for the industry for cars and electronics coming across the pacific or materials we are sending over there. there's big news on the trade front when congress comes back. host: the president said he wanted a bigger scope when it comes to trade issues.
2:42 am
guest: he really emphasized that he wants to be competitive in parts of southeast asia. we do trade a good deal, lowering our trade with some countries that would make us positioned to snd goods overseas and bring goods that we want. so he made these trade agreements a high priority. host: independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you're on. go ahead. caller: i have a question for ginger. my first question is that if a company sees their employee, all -- gives them a raise or lets them go or resource action based on their quality of work and the need of the business, so the way i'm seeing the congress and the productivity of the congress, i mean, compared to the previous congress i know that there's a huge difference in terms of their productivity, how -- any comment that you can make on that? guest: this is the less productive congress than the previous we've seen. you're correct there. we see two different spins on that. they pass less bills they've made less laws. we have a divided government, the senate controlled by the democrats. speaker boehner says it's a good thing less regulations, taxes. we saw minority leader pelosi get up yesterday and say they've gone from being the do nothing
2:43 am
congress to the make things worse congress. she's arguing that the lack of action is hurting the american people. and we were talking about earlier the nine days they're going to have left when they return in september to get us a continuing resolution done, the debt ceiling looming likely in october. those things need to get done and they haven't done it and that's her argument. so people are correct they are a less productive congress than in the past. but both sides would argue that's either a good thing or bad thing. host: the speaker talked about the frustration that some had about spending levels but did say the sequestration was going to remain in place. >> the appropriators, they've had a tough job over the last couple of years. they've take an lot of tough votes in their committee. so i understand the frustration that they are dealing with. but i just want to make clear, the sequestration is going to remain in effect until the president agrees to cut some reforms that will allow us to remove it. the president insisted on the sequester, none of us wanted it, none of us like it. there are smarter ways to cut spending. the house has moved twice over the last year-and-a-half to replace the sequester. we saw no action -- host: sorry for the sound cutoff. but to the point the president
2:44 am
insisted on sequestration. that is the house speaker's take. >> there's a lot of messaging that's gone on. nobody wants to take ownership of it and nobody wants to keep it. everyone wants to get rid of it but no one's done anything to get rid of it. there are members of his caucus who like the sequestration and think it should stay in place. that's likely why you've seen it sthay that way. a number of conservatives who want it to stay that way and they've used their clout to make sure no bills move forward.
2:45 am
2:46 am
host: are we talking tea party? guest: we're talking tea party type conservatives. there is a wing in that caucus that is fairly conservative. there's a number of members, we saw them vote against john boehner for the speaker role. we saw them kill plan b. how quickly we forget that side, we move it to another one. but there are a group of tea party, very more conservative than the rest of their caucus members who do like it, who think it's ok that it stays that way maybe tweak here or there around the edges but leaving it mostly in part. so it's easy to say you don't like the sequestration. it's harder to say what are you going to do about it? host: if they face shutdown then debt ceiling issues, how do we bring those types around to keep
2:47 am
the voting block together? guest: surprisingly enough newt gingrich, who oversaw the last time we had a government shutdown that was pushed by house republicans when he was the speaker. and those politics were very bad for republicans. they brought the republicans the joke read my lips. also not allowed to shut down government any more.
2:48 am
so there will be some who will not be swayed that way. there are those who will not vote for a bill because they worry about the politics. but there are a number of republicans who are likely to be moved over when they remember how bad that was for them. host: billy. guest: good morning. i think it's time to change the fiscal year in 1974 when the congressional budget act was put into place they changed it from july 1 to october 1. with the august recess there's just not enough time for the two houses to do all the 12 individual appropriation bills. we're getting these omnibus bills a year after year. it should be moved to january. they should have time to do the bills, allow our representatives the opportunity to amend them work them out between the house and senate. it would also give the president when he submits his budget in february the ability to offer recissions. now, if he wents to cut back spending himself he's already more than halfway into the fiscal
2:49 am
year. he could never really cut spending. it's time to change the timetable. guest: i'm sorry to say this would be like the college student who gets an extension and waits until the next deadline. the house passed four of the 12 appropriation bills and this was after making a big deal about regular order. they wanted a budget passed. they passed a budget and then everything fell apart and then when they were passing budgets were months later. they won't take the budgets to conference which means there is no agreement. they started writing appropriation bills without budget. which means there is a lot of distance between those pieces of legislation too and with only four of them they're not going to get them brought together. we talk about deadlines in january or september or july. they have had months they could have done it if they wanted before august. they haven't. so i think that moving it would likely be of little difference in this situation. host: a viewer contributes. guest: there are a number of bills that have headed over. but we talk about what can get done and what can't. both sides passed pieces of legislation that will never see the light of day in the other chamber. the senate passed a gun bill that's gone virtually nowhere or -- they didn't pass a gun bill. they took up the gun bill that was never going to get anywhere in the house. they've taken up legislation on the immigration bill that isn't going to go anywhere in the house. and the house has passed a number of pieces of legislation to reduce the size of government that aren't going to go anywhere. the big problem is that neither side is talking to each other and talking about bills that have a lot of comprehensive reform they have a lot of bipartisanship. so yes, there are bills on reid's desk and boehner's desk. those bills are going nowhere.
2:50 am
host: why did student loans work so well? guest: it took a month but they expired on july 1, they didn't get it done until august. then there was lots of partisan back and forth on that one. but it was like the fiscal cliff. there was a real life impact that was going to happen when people started taking out their loans. people go back to school, loans normally come out the first, second week of classes. when that happen and people saw 6.8% interest rates that was going to be a real effect and they got it done in time to prevent that. often this congress needs a real hard deadline. host: wisconsin, democrat's line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question about the immigration bill. i do live in wisconsin and there are a lot of democrats that are against this bill. and i want to know why the democrats they're for this immigration bill which we are paying for immigrants to come here and take our jobs. also, this bill is going to cost trillion of dollars when we say that we have no money. thank you. guest: there's a lot of discussion, two really good questions about the immigration bill, what's happened to it, who is backing it in the senate we saw full senate backing. likely to see almost all full democratic backing in the house. this is a bill that sort of defies partisan lines sometimes. and it's not really a
2:51 am
conservative versus liberal bill. those sort of ideologies don't get into this legislation as much as some other bills do. as for the cost, that's going to be a big debating point if the house ever really starts talking about the comprehensive bill passed by the senate. there are costs in it. there's an increase in border patrol. there's an increase in some of the other costs. supporters of the legislation say, look, when you add this many people to the league working rules who can go get a job, pay
2:52 am
their taxes, pay social security, pay their income taxes, that the benefit is going to outway any of the cost in the bill. cbo scored it that way. there are series that have done that say the opposite. so the cost of legislation is going to be a big point of contention. host: there's a story this morning that says they're crafting a bill that would double the amount of guest worker visas. guest: that's a place where this bill is not so partisan. he worked in a group of eight in the house that was bipartisan to try to come up with a deal. and the guest worker program is something that a lot of people identified that has been listed as legislation. there are a number of places that don't have the people to do the job. host: there are -- from our independent line. caller: i think it should be made law that congress should do
2:53 am
the work five days a week 50 weeks a year. i mean, it's about time to get something. why should we pay their health care? they're part-time employees. and as far as congress getting something done, how come every time a trade bill comes up they can do it overnight and celebrate and we haven't won a trade deal since the boston tea party? i mean, are they stupid or are they paid off? guest: congress will tell you they're working when they go home. remember it's going to be in your district next week. you can find them. that's why they go home. but there's always when the other party in the minority the ability to say they're not
2:54 am
working away from washington and not getting anything done. we're going to hear that from democrats the next few weeks. sometimes they make extra loud shows about it. the house democrats could all show up one day. but they'll say -- a lot of room for both sides to be critical. host: warner said congress should stay in. granted he's in virginia. guest: he has a quick drive down the road. i think he stays at home when they're in session. so but yeah, they could both -- we saw ms. pelosi say we're ready to work, stay, get things done. a lot of members are going to be saying that in press releases while they're in the next couple of weeks. so it's an easy argument to make when you're in the minority. host: off of twitter there's a question about if the 2014 election maneuvering is seeping in. guest: it was seeping in about two days after the last round. there's starting to be more talk though. a lot of discussion that these big bells, grand bargain, immigration bill, any of these things can't get done after january. that once we get into the
2:55 am
election year they're just going to be impossible. and they're acting that way in responding as such. they're trying to get things done quickly. or they're putting their positions in place. we saw israel, the house campaign committee saying they're obstructionists and if they're going to be obstructionists we're going to run that way. host: you mentioned nancy pelosi. she held a briefing for reporters, talking about republicans not producing bills or jobs. >> how do you explain to the american people that today congress will go into an august recess and after more than six months in this congress this republican congress we still have no jobs bill, we have no budget bill, and we have the threat of shutting down government and not raising the debt ceiling
2:56 am
without repealing the affordable care act? this was a do nothing congress and now it has gone to something worse. it is an aimless congress that is falling into chaos to make matters worse congress. we should not leave until we address the challenges that we face. guest: pelosi was really
2:57 am
dragging that message. that's what she started with. this was her message that she was going to stand up and make in front of the camera calling them the make matters worse congress, chaotic. and talking about congress as a whole she also talked earlier this week after a meeting with the president that the public gets lost on sort of the inside the beltway fighting about obstruction, fighting about process. and that they're trying to make that a message that people understand, that the voters understand, and that looking ahead to 2014 that the voters blame
2:58 am
republicans for things not getting done. host: dayton, ohio. greg, good morning. democrat's line. caller: yes. i believe that the congress isn't doing a thing. and nothing will change until 2014. and the same people that went out to vote for barack obama for 2012 need to get off their butt and get out here and vote for 2014 because this congress is not operating with president obama. and as far as the immigration
2:59 am
bill, it's -- the immigration people, i mean, if they pass that bill and say they're going to come and give them jobs, congress is not creating jobs. they're not putting jobs out here for them to have. so 2014 is the thing. we have to get out here and change this house of representatives in order for us to get anything done. guest: 2014 is going to be the challenge and you alluded to, which is how do democrats get their voters to get excited without the president on the ballot in 2008 and 2012, particularly in 2008 being wave elections president obama drove a lot of people to the polls, didn't see that happen in 2010. the next mid-term elections how do they motivate people? and we see them looking really far ahead and trying to plan for that, trying to win more seats. but the tricky thing here is that they've gone through a round of redistricting in their way. most of that redistricting was
3:00 am
overseen by republicans. there are not as many districts as the democrats are going to take. the republicans have a lot more safer districts. as a result winning back control of the house for democrats in 2014 is going to be a real uphill battle. and holding on to the senate also could be tough for them. there's a number of retirements, democrats in red states up for reelection. it's going to be a big piece to chew off for democrats in 2014. host: an e-mail asked guest: the senate is traditionally the place of last product. they have the filibuster. they can stop things with almost one member. they have been stopping things. we've seen the senate moving more legislation that has the potential to maybe be considered by the bipartisan immigration bill being the prime example. the senate is moving a little more. i hate to use the word obstructionist. it's so loaded and we try to stay away from the terms that have connotation. the house is not moving things. they're not taking up bills. but this isn't surprising. they're the opposite party. they don't want these to happen. they're not going to move them.
3:01 am
3:02 am
3:03 am
3:04 am
3:05 am
3:06 am
3:07 am
3:08 am
3:09 am
3:10 am
3:11 am
3:12 am
3:13 am
3:14 am
3:15 am
3:16 am
3:17 am
3:18 am
3:19 am
3:20 am
3:21 am
3:22 am
3:23 am
3:24 am
3:25 am
3:26 am
3:27 am
3:28 am
3:29 am
3:30 am
3:31 am
3:32 am
3:33 am
3:34 am
3:35 am
3:36 am
3:37 am
3:38 am
3:39 am
3:40 am
3:41 am
3:42 am
3:43 am
3:44 am
3:45 am
3:46 am
3:47 am
3:48 am
3:49 am
3:50 am
3:51 am
3:52 am
3:53 am
3:54 am
3:55 am
3:56 am
3:57 am
3:58 am
3:59 am
4:00 am
4:01 am
4:02 am
4:03 am
4:04 am
4:05 am
4:06 am
4:07 am
4:08 am
4:09 am
4:10 am
4:11 am
4:12 am
4:13 am
4:14 am
4:15 am
4:16 am
4:17 am
4:18 am
4:19 am
4:20 am
4:21 am
4:22 am
4:23 am
4:24 am
4:25 am
4:26 am
4:27 am
4:28 am
4:29 am
4:30 am
4:31 am
4:32 am
4:33 am
4:34 am
4:35 am
4:36 am
4:37 am
4:38 am
4:39 am
4:40 am
4:41 am
4:42 am
4:43 am
4:44 am
4:45 am
4:46 am
4:47 am
4:48 am
4:49 am
4:50 am
4:51 am
4:52 am
4:53 am
4:54 am
4:55 am
4:56 am
4:57 am
4:58 am
4:59 am
5:00 am
sometimes you have to leave politics at the door and get things done. i think that is a positive. i'm sure you will appreciate what the secretary has to say. the american society of civil engineers gave us a poor grade again. tippingt the point, a
5:01 am
point where we will have to figure out how to do this in a way that keeps us competitive in the world. there is a federal role. not to do it all. working with the state and the local governments. when you look after our history, it is lost on some folk that the articles of confederation failed for a lot of reasons. the breaking point was the transportation issue. they cannot navigate the potomac river and into the ohio territory. they realize if we are not able to move our goods and connect our nation we are not going to be a nation. when they went back to draw up the constitution, they talk about commerce and establishing the roads.
5:02 am
he said something that is lost sometimes in the debate. that is government should provide three things for the will, security, maintain justice and maintain security. that is good for all of the people. as he moved forward and as we have moved forward through this country, whether it is the transcontinental railroad or the highway system, those were all significant works that brought this country together that made this country which i believe it is the giant we had today. we had a transportation system that has physically connected this nation. we need to me forward with something. it needs to be on a bipartisan basis. there are issues that have been bipartisan. transportation is one of them. we are making sure we give you more flexibility.
5:03 am
it is essential. our committee has mentioned the development act. we are ready to mark it up in september and has an floor action in october. the senate has artie passed their version of it. we've learned a lot from watching the senate to go through that. we worked closely. we met with members of congress on both sides of the aisle. we have a bipartisan project that puts the number on the committee and said committee. when a number of stakeholders.
5:04 am
i cannot distinguish between a republican and democrat because they have the same kind of complaints about not having flexibility for bringing them having more influence in the process. that is a big reason we are able to have that. there are significant reforms. i think the state will be encouraged by what they have to say. it is about trade and jobs. certainly you are going to get job when you a rebuilding locks. those are short-term jobs. if you look at the trade in the
5:05 am
next few years it will double and then double again. these are good jobs for americans. they cannot export their goods if it is not an efficient system. it will not be competitive. this is a jobs bill. this sets hard deadlines on the time and cost of studies. they do not pass it up the line. we have concurrent reviews. we're she mining the environmental review process. it'll be a responsible though. we are authorizing programs that
5:06 am
have been authorized over the past 40 or 50 years. they will not continue to build this massive backlog. we're looking at some of the smaller underserved perks. we need to make the investment they need to do. it maximizes the ability to contribute their own funds. miami has had their money in the bank to do this for about three or four years.
5:07 am
they do not have the authorization. people want to put this into the mix. it can accelerate things. this is the first word that has no air marks. there are projects in it. this would be the first word. this'll have a new process. states will be involved early on in this. there is a lot of positive
5:08 am
things in the senate bill. after they passed the word there will be the corps of engineers. the congress has to authorize these projects. this is one of the things i am adamant about. the word is on its way. this is very difficult to do. i believe there needs to be a passage to rail system. there are some that may not be great ideas but there are places we need to focus on to get it done.
5:09 am
i do not live long in the northeast corridor. the thing that makes it should be the place the focus is that we own the lines there. the other thing is you have 18% of our population living on 3% of our land mass where it there is the ability to get them. this is something we need to take a serious look at. the most congested airspace is above the northeast corridor. 70% of all that are delayed or canceled occur because of interaction with the northeast corridor.
5:10 am
bringing the private sector in. as we have seen, the ridership has grown. there is a significant reform that needs to take place in the operation. we will continue to work across the aisle. it is made up of several states. especially if they are putting their money into the system. when we have a divided government we are figuring out the solutions together. we will be working on reauthorization of map 21.
5:11 am
how do we fund it? we need to consider everything that is out there. how do we get these dollars in net to be able to make the investments that we need? we are looking at that. i know the house is committed to doing tax reform. they are looking at these types of things. the senate is committed to doing tax reform. we are encouraging our brother and over there to move on a lot of these tax reforms. i know aviation oversight is important to many of your states. i think they are finally right sized. as he me forward we need figure out a policy to encourage the airline industry to continue to
5:12 am
work i make these investments. they do not take money. they're making the profits to drive that back in without government support. finally, i come to you today to ask for your help. certainly i cannot do it alone. i traveled here not only learn from what you do but to help us engage your constituencies to the importance of this. i think almost everyone one of you mentioned infrastructure. it is the act phone of the-- backbone of the economy.
5:13 am
we are needing you to help explain to them the importance of moving a transportation bill. it is good for the business. it is to advocate for the transportation bill. working with groups like that, there is another one that has been formed in washington. mary peters who is here at us today has an very much an advocate of america's infrastructure alliance that has
5:14 am
an funded by the airlines, water transportation, put this together to form the alliance to advocate and put the american people. you do not understand the importance of the waterway system. making sure the american people understand that is important. it is a big effort. we're all going to need to pitch in and make sure we are involved effort.for.-- in this we have an absolutely critical role in moving this agenda forward. congress needs to hear from you. i believe we can have success. i believe we will be able to do what is necessary to keep this country in a competitive state. if you have places like brazil they want to drive down the
5:15 am
cost. these are the kind that competitive situations that are occurring out there. they have signed a deal that they will not go through the panama canal. the world is getting smaller. we have to remain competitive. i think this is a vital area. i appreciate the opportunity. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. let's open up to questions.
5:16 am
>> thank you very much for joining us. i'd to officially welcome you to the home of the last three years champions. i am sure we will have fun with that as well. i do not even mention the 45th super bowl. we appreciate your being here. we appreciate your commitment. this is a great and rotation advocate. he has a harley in washington. it all revolves around harley one way or another. first off, he mentioned the inks -- highway 31 to enter state. 41.way 41 rtto interstate
5:17 am
we understand transportation is not just about transportation. in our state we think about transportation. we think about agriculture. we think about manufacturing. we think about all of the core industries. even the things about beer, oftentimes it is not just about competing among brands. it is about competing to see which brewery can get a cold beer on the harbor. the zoo interchange is just on the way. we also have a great area. we have a transit center.
5:18 am
we have the airport which is one of the fastest-growing airports in the past decade. these are all vital links to our economic efforts. i appreciate the focus. these are one of the few areas where you do that. >> this is really outstanding. >> thank you. i would like to properly introduce a governor she was a
5:19 am
former chairman of the national governors association. ed is from north dakota. ed, please stand. thank you. it's good to see you. [applause] >> guess i should save my apologies. i just want to thank you for being here. just one question about how this will progress. there are times when politics entered into the debate. it has been delayed.
5:20 am
in a state like ours where we have had several natural disasters in the last few years, we are in tremendous need of getting some flood protection objects moving forward. we desperately need a couple of projects to be authorized. i hope we can get through the political challenges. one little problem for us with the bill is there are a couple of situations where we do need a reconnaissance study and to look at the entire roberval a chain. -- the entire river valley
5:21 am
chain. needs to be analyzed by the corps of engineers. the answer to us was that there is no such thing as a new project. i understand one easy way of holding down spending as to never authorize anything new. it is not really progressive when it comes to managing the nation's infrastructure. i hope that somehow, someway there can be such a thing as a new feasibility study occasionally for a new project. >> i am cautiously optimistic. they have moved this along the way. we watched the bill go through. i feel confident we will be able
5:22 am
to move this into confidence.-- into conference. there is a great thirst and hunger to get this bill. part of what i want to do is to start on the next bill. we should be going through and looking what this brings us and through a process. it should be every year if we have to be. i know there are studies out there that need to be done, especially after you have a natural disaster with the flooding. our goal is to not only get this out but to get this on the next word of though.-- next water bill. >> thank you. thank you for being with us. it is good to see you again. i think most of us recognize how important the interstate freeway
5:23 am
system has been. we came together as a country and connected ourselves for better accessibility. it helps our economy. it has been a godsend. they use federal dollars to do that. they made the, unnecessary regulations.-- in the group, they made the comment that if we unnecessarymany regulations, strings attached, they can build better roads for less money. they suggested they could do this for 20% or 25% less money.
5:24 am
we understand the need for a accountability and oversight. are we over regulating to point that it has cost us money? >> i've talked to every smart person i can in the united states and around the world to get a number to put on that. it seems to me just on interest alone it would be 8% or 10%. outsidere a mile apart. of philadelphia, there was a stream, and there were two bridges that needed to be rebuilt.
5:25 am
they were a mile apart. the one bridge was using state and local money only. it cost $600,000. it was completed. identical, hade, federal dollars, costing between $1.2 million and $1.3 million. they were still going through the process. we have to figure out how to streamline these ends. we did -- these things. we did some of that with map 21. you folks probably know better than anybody, passing legislation is tough enough, but implementing it and trying to get the federal agencies to implement them the way we intended it to be can sometimes be problematic. you're absolutely right. that is one of the things, streamlining these things so we can get things done quicker. >> maybe you have done this already, but it was enlightening to me with our state road
5:26 am
construction, putting a lot of resources into our infrastructure, to hear from those who actually bill gross and say, let us help you understand -- build roads and say, let us help you understand. have a hearing. give us your suggestions and ideas on how we can do it better, streamline the process, build better roads, and build them with less money. >> that is exactly what we did in the water bill. we had hearings in roundtable discussions with stakeholders. whether it was the shippers or the directors or whoever has a stake in that inland waterway port and harbor system, the floodplain folks, we got their input into it. one of the things that we did was to less hearings. they are more formal. everybody gets five minutes. at a roundtable similar to this, it is pretty freewheeling. we get a lot more information. that has been very helpful to
5:27 am
us. we will continue to do that crude -- that. fallon?nor >> my former colleague. >> i can tell stories about you. see you. thank you so much for coming to our governors association meeting. congratulations on your chairmanship. it is good to see a fellow colleague on the transportation committee, moving to top leadership. we appreciate you coming to join us. a couple things i want to mention. i had the opportunity to be with you on the committee. one of the water -- the water bill is one of our biggest challenges. a couple things i see on the backside of being a governor, the federal rules and regulations and entities and the transportation committee with all, projects -- first of getting the bill, knowing how much is available to states is very important, but the other
5:28 am
thing i have experienced as a governor is working with environmental impact studies is the time it takes to get those studies done. many times, the corps of engineers will tell us a do not have the money to do the studies on major projects for economic development. we have had one circumstance where we have a major development that could bring in about $500 million around our state, but yet there is the study in being able to utilize other studies that have been done around the lake, not in that particular area, and utilize that data to go into a new study that needs to be done. some flexibility with the corps of engineers, if you could encourage them to work with the states and governors, helping us move projects along that can create jobs and investment, versus taking two years to do a study. that is one of the things i see on the backside of it. i appreciate your mention of the i-40 crosstown.
5:29 am
you were able to help us open up. it took us a long time to do that. we did open it and finish it under my watch. another project that i think you are familiar with, because i think it may have happened during the time that you were on the committee, was one we had a bridge that went down in oklahoma, the webbers falls bridge, which was on the i-40 going from arkansas to oklahoma, a barge hit and crashed the bridge into the river. we lost life. we were able to work years ago to create things and get some waivers to speed up the construction of a major interstate bridge in our state. have some leeway through some waivers through federal highway administration. that forivized construction crews to get it done faster. we were able to build it really reverse sideis the of taking a long time of building a bridge. anytime we can allow states more
5:30 am
flexibility to incentivize quicker construction is certainly better for our state, better for our budgets, and better for all of us. i just want to mention that as you are on break -- >> not vacation. i can assure you. >> a former member of congress would say, on break. i know you worked very hard when you're on these breaks. you're busy with town halls and meetings like this. as you are on break and you come back to finish the final budget negotiations for the fiscal year , i know there has been talk about shutting down the federal government and various issues, but for us as governors, uncertainty created in washington, d.c., by not knowing whether there will be a budget, a continuing resolution, it creates uncertainty in our state where a lot of our investors and companies delay making decisions about expansions or creating new
5:31 am
jobs. that uncertainty that you have in washington -- i know it is not your fault, but just in general -- it creates problems for us and our local economies. we went through sequester. that did not help. one thing i hear from our road contractors is, the uncertainty does not allow us to plan out in our hiring practices, in our building practices, not knowing whether the money will be there for a bridge or highway spending. those are the things i see on the backside. >> i understand that uncertainty not only from our budgets, but the money coming from the federal government to build highways -- that is something that i hear from my constituents all the time also. it is a big problem. as far as streamlining map 21, we did streamline some of that. it makes no sense to people smarter than me that pilgrims who say, if you are going to replace a bridge or roadway,
5:32 am
why'd you have to go through all the same processes? it does not make sense. we are looking forward to seeing that streamlined. the corps of engineers, trying to streamline their process, we have a situation on the delaware river, governor rendell pointed out that they were going to dredge, and they are constantly dredging those rivers, but there was a species of fish that they were going to do a deeper dredge, and the governor said, this is ridiculous. we know that the fish have quadrupled over the last several years with dredging operations occurring. why are we going through to study? it is maddening. it's got to be maddening to you when you see your precious tax dollars being squandered on endless studies. we will try to reduce that. look forward to it. if there is something coming up and you have a problem with the corps of engineers, come see me. the venture when you talk to your representatives, they will come see me. feel free to contact us if we can be of help. >> i think we are going to have to move along.
5:33 am
>> you've got to let and my other colleagues. >> we have another guest speaker that we need to give respect to. we have let the questioning go on a little bit beyond our allocated time. i appreciate your understanding. you, mr. secretary, mr. chairman, for being present. thank you all for your good questions. we appreciate your presence. [applause] >> i have too many things i need you to help me with.
5:34 am
>> good morning. our second speaker will be the honorable anthony foxx, secretary of the department of transportation. he was sworn in july 2, 2013. he served as the mayor of charlotte from 2009 to 2013. he served two thomas on the-- two terms in the charlotte city council. this is a lively, bipartisan strong group. i cannot want to take more time in to your introduction. secretary foxx, i want to thank you for honoring us with your presence. >> thank you, governor. i want to thank the national governors' association, the chairs in particular. i also want to pay respects to the home state governor, governor walker.
5:35 am
thank you for hosting this wonderful group. i also want to thank governor walker for hosting this event. you know that transportation is more than the asphalt we pay for the train to rebuild. transportation is a bridge to the opportunity. it is the highway that insures that a mom gets our kids home safely. it is the freight or the cargo ship that exports american goods around the world. transportation moves america forward. when we build bridges, highways, transit systems, airports, and
5:36 am
ports, we are putting our people to work in helping businesses expand. most importantly, we are giving the next generation the tools to compete. take a look of the golden gate bridge or the hoover dam or the transcontinental railroads. these are symbols of america's grit and innovation. those things were not built by us. they were built by previous generations and have been bequeathed to us. what will we bequeath to another generation? the generations before us believed in a better future for the next generation. while funding is tight, i believe we can still build great things as a country. we can also answer president
5:37 am
obama's call to give the middle class a better bargain. we can ensure that the rungs on the ladder of opportunity are not so far apart. this is the challenge of our generation and we must work together across political lines, across state, federal, local lines to address it. as secretary of transportation, my priority is to make our transportation system the safest and most efficient in the world. we will continue to work hard so that americans feel safe when they get into a car, get on a bus, board a plane or get on a bicycle. we will be working with our partners to get more from what we have so that taxpayers can trust us to make smart investments. efficiency enough is not going to get us to prosperity.
5:38 am
over the long term, we have got to be more creative. we have got to work together. as you know, we have a lot of options in our toolbox and even more options we need to put on the table. we have seen how public-private partnerships can kickstart important projects, such as the historic millwork district in minnesota. there has been $48 billion in infrastructure investment across america in places like illinois, california, and texas. we have seen our financing loan program help denver, colorado finance their railroads station. those projects would not have been possible without leadership that the state and local level.
5:39 am
frankly, governors can make it happen. you are the x-factor. you are the difference between a deteriorating road and a 21st century highway that is safe and efficient. i can tell you after meeting with members of congress on both sides of the aisle, they agree. the hard part is agreeing on a way to fund these needs. as a country, i know we can do it. map 21 was a good start. it provided states with 2 years of funding. it gave people a better value
5:40 am
for their money by institutionalizing best practices and allowing them to work faster and smarter. map 21 expires next september. we are facing long-term deficits. the way we have been doing business is not sustainable. i do not have to tell you. many are already looking at innovative ways to find your own transportation needs. this year, half of all state legislatures have considered or approved measures dealing with transportation funding. 14 states have discussed raising their fuel taxes. several have moved to protect transportation funding from being raided for general expenses.
5:41 am
citizens have come together to figure out common-sense ways to address our transportation needs. governor o'malley in the state of maryland. they found they were driving on roads that were congested and deteriorated and its cost maryland residents $6.20 billion a year. his state has the longest average daily commute in america and his constituents could not afford more time spent in traffic. thanks to his leadership, maryland will be able to a -- invest $4 billion in infrastructure over the next six years. in all of these states, we are not looking at infrastructure and through a partisan lands.-- through a partisan lens. they are looking at crowded buses, congested highways and train stations. they are looking at potholes and bridges that are so old they
5:42 am
could qualify for medicare. they are hearing from businesses that need 21st century infrastructure to grow. when it comes to transportation, everything we do has a local impact and requires local cooperation. i know that from experience. i worked with republicans and democrats as a mayor to address these challenges facing our cities. time after time, we put aside our differences to do what was right for our constituents. i know that you do the same in your states. today, i am reaching out to you. i want to hear your ideas and know how you would prioritize projects in your states. how you organize transportation needs. the american people are counting on all was to lead and make critical investments to move this country forward. i believe we can start by answering president obama's called for another bargained for
5:43 am
-- call for a better bargain for the middle class. his proposal would invest $50 billion in our nation's infrastructure with $40 billion target for the areas of greatest need. we would also leverage private sector investments to help communities take on infrastructure for the 21st century. that is what we need to build a strong america. as we work to make the president's vision a reality, i hope what we do will serve as an example of how our congress can come together to help our nation's infrastructure. let's come together. less and less in the future.-- let's invest in the future. let's build transportation that works and is second to none. i am happy to answer your questions. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, mr. secretary. let's open it up for questions.
5:44 am
governor? >> thank you for comment, mr. secretary. at local level and the state level in illinois, we have invested $14 billion for transportation. our tollway is $12 billion. we are also doing high-speed rail from chicago to st. louis. we are grateful to you in the president for your commitment to transportation. just recently, we are just about finished with a bridge from east st. louis to st. louis called the stan musial memorial bridge. we would like you to come and you can see all of america from that bridge. it was done with a 26% minority work force. we worked with the federal
5:45 am
government and it is a good symbol of what you just said. we have to make sure america knows that when we invest in infrastructure and bridges, we are putting people to work in helping our businesses expand. >> i will try to make it. it sounds like a good thing to do. i was in st. louis yesterday. to your point, i was there to break ground on a project. it is of incredible importance to st. louis. they are capping a freeway that sits in the downtown area and the st. louis arch. we put $20 million into getting that done. there will be a $380 million public and private investment to
5:46 am
get the work done. what it points out is what you just said. when we make the investment, it does have a return on investment and it improves communities. it improves mobility and it makes people safer. i look forward to being there. >> i would note that the project would allow you to what all the way to the train station to the stadium to watch the cardinals play. it is an unbelievably transform into a project that would not have been possible. those of you who have been to the arch, we have literally dropped the highway and build a park over the top of it. it is going to be dramatic. we are coming up on the 50th anniversary of the arch. the cooperation between the park service and the state of illinois and everybody is incredible, the amount of private dollars that have been
5:47 am
leveraged to a small amount of federal and state dollars. thank you very much. >> governor walker? >> i have a question. the governor is not with us right now. he will be with us to launch a different discussion. governor quinn and i just had a groundbreaking for a similar issue, the river crossing. not only crossing state lines, but across the st. clair river. this is a 30-year process, getting the approval to do that bridge, which is 50 beyond its expectancy. we will let you know about the ribbon cutting for that. you talked about economic impact. a question for you that you do
5:48 am
not have to answer now. in addition to hosting all of these wonderful governors, i was at to be experimental and aviation association. it started in 1953 in the wisconsin. it is about 500,000 visitors for one week in wisconsin. it becomes the busiest air traffic control center in the world. it has about $110 million in impact in that region. the challenges with air traffic control components, they picked up most of the costs, about $500,000 of that. there is an economic impact. since you are here, i would ask if you would take a look at that. for them, it is a major impact.
5:49 am
there are eaa chapters all across america. it is an incredibly important component. it has a huge economic impact. >> thank you very much. >> hello to you, mr. secretary. just had the opportunity to say hello to my friends, bill shuster -- my friend, bill shuster. you are a friend of ray lahood. i bring that up to say that the governor and myself and people like bill and ray have distinct philosophical orientations as members of congress. i think i can say without reservation that we are pretty mission-oriented, particularly the transportation committee.
5:50 am
we may have had different reasons and different motivations for voting the way we did. we move in the end to get the vote done on the basis of the project in the proposals that were in front of us. i put that forward because i would like to know from you, in the wake of chairman rogers indicating his skepticism -- probably the wrong word -- that the spending goals, while they may have had their difficulties and challenges getting past in terms of authorization, there has been a lot of fighting over the numbers -- there has not been a lot of fighting over the
5:51 am
there were numbers within that sequestration figure that had been agreed to. i understand what has taken place is that even though there was an agreement, hands were shaking, deals were made. i do not say that in a pejorative sense. some of the members in the congress wants to cut it further even though there has already been an agreement. my question to you is, are you aware of what this is? i assume other governors here are doing what we are doing. i have the sequestration task force. nonpartisan. i have business, labor, nonprofit, construction companies in it. paving companies, everything in it. i was working under the assumption that sequestration was sequestration and we would not weep bitter tears about it.
5:52 am
if they are going to change the numbers, it is really going to mess us up. you have any idea that if the sequestration numbers change, what are they going to change. i am trying to put my budget together. i am not wanting to argue or throw darts or rocks at anybody. i just want to know what the numbers are. >> thank you for the question, governor. i will refer to be chairman, who is on the legislative branch in terms of what the internal discussions and working have been. my understanding is that on the house side, in the process of
5:53 am
working through what had been previously agreed upon budget caps, as they started to move a bill through, they are concerned about the impact of those caps. what i have heard and read is that they will come back in the fall and see if they can come back to the table with something on the house side. a similar exercise occurred on the senate side. the senate bill was beyond sequestration levels. we, at the department, felt better about the senate bill. sequestration is a blunt instrument.
5:54 am
from an arithmetic perspective, it places caps and makes it difficult for us to accomplish the goals we have for our country across a variety of fronts. i think there is a growing sense that there is a need to re-look at it. >> you do not have any idea of what the numbers are or some of the projects. i can live with it. >> with i am saying to you is that the situation is obviously very fluid. in our department, we happen to be ready for just about anything. >> thank you, mr. secretary.
5:55 am
we are honored to have you with us. most governors recognize how important transportation is to their success in their states. as a former elected official, you understand that. it is economic development and the ability to expand economically. in the state of utah, we have stepped up our commitment to transportation in a significant way. we have put 500% more state money into state highways, roads, and into a augmenting the state system. we just completed 15 miles of interstate 15, expanding the lane capacity, hov lanes. we did it all without federal dollars. we are trying to put our resources where we think they need to be in the infrastructure and road building. i would like to ask you the same
5:56 am
question i asked chairman bill shuster. i had a group of contractors i met with a few months back. they build a lot of roads in the western part of the united states. their laments to me was the fact that they believe regulations coming to the federal -- from the federal government are burdensome and counterproductive and the -- there are too many strings attached to the federal dollars and it is inhibiting them from building roads in the most efficient and effective way possible. they said they could build roads better for 25% less if there is regulation reform. i would like to have you respond to that issue and if that is something that is being addressed in your area of responsibility. do we have too many regulations getting in the way of effective, efficient, and cost-effective road construction?
5:57 am
>> that is a great question. thank you for asking it. one of the first acts i have taken as transportation secretary is a notice of rule- making that pertains to truckers. right now, if a truck driver is running a route, they have to inspect the vehicle at the time they picked the vehicle up and have to do it again when they return it. they are required to submit a piece of paper each time they do that. we have found that 95% of the time there is no problem with the vehicle. the paper work is being submitted to say there is no problem with the vehicle. we have made its proposed rule that eliminates the need to file that piece of paper. there will still be an inspection, but we do not need to be told the vehicle is ok if
5:58 am
it is ok. we expect that rule will save the trucking industry $1.70 billion. what i want to say to you at the outset is that i am interested in ways that we can streamline and make more efficient our transportation system as long as we are not compromising safety. i am interested in your list of any potential changes to our rules, regulations that you think will help us make the system more efficient. i have been talking to a few of your colleagues, governor malloy in connecticut, who has a big bridge project that is coming in at $280 million under budget and ahead of schedule. in transportation, time is money. if we can speed things along, i want us to do it. we have an internal initiative
5:59 am
and map 21 allows us to look at streamlining in a big way. if you have ideas about regulation, i am interesting in partnering with you to make things run better -- i am is interested in partnering with you to make things run better. >> secretary foxx, thank you for joining us. i am glad you have experience working for a political subdivision. it is a good perspective for you to bring to your job. the question is on the problem of certainty of funding for states. in north dakota, we need more transportation money just like everybody else. even a bigger problem for us is
6:00 am
the sixth month authorization, the six month funding periods cause us a lot of problems with the construction season is extremely seasonal. is extremely seasonal. can you work with congress to try to create more predictability of the cash flow for at least a 12 month period? base least some kind of certainty with the possibility of some enhancement later. we cannot bid projects with a federal share of less we know that money absolutely, for sure is forthcoming. the way it has been going in the last few years, we literally have to wait until the last second to be sure we have the money for a bid.

tv
Washington This Week
CSPAN August 4, 2013 1:00am-6:01am EDT

News/Business.

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 69, America 13, Washington 12, China 11, Richard Nixon 11, Obama 8, California 5, Utah 5, Foxx 4, Bill Shuster 4, Colorado 4, Wisconsin 4, Vietnam 4, Kentucky 4, Edith Roosevelt 3, Brian Frye 3, Cnn 3, Walker 3, Illinois 3, Maine 3
Network CSPAN
Duration 05:01:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 17
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 8/4/2013
Views
32